Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

AN ERROR CORRECTED (To the Editor) Sir, —May I be permitted to point out ah error in your report with reference to certain remarks reputed to have been made by my wife at the meeting of Masterton women, held last night, to protest against the socialisation of doctors. As a matter of fact my wife did not even attend the meeting, as she has been in the South Island for some days and has not yet returned. I hardly think it within my rights to mention, even, my wife’s views on any subject without her consent, but as her name has been mentioned with regard to the matter, I do not think I am disclosing any confidence when I refer to a conversation we had on the very subject last week. I was very upset about the whole matter and said I thought it was nothing short of criminal that a fine body of professional men, such as the doctors, should be treated in the same manner as minorities are treated by Hitler, and said I would write to the Press about the matter and give vent to my feelings, whatever little effect it might have. I for one was not going to stand for Nazism in New Zealand, especially when we were fighting against it for freedom and democracy. I also said’l believed that Hitler had been winning the war in this country for a long time, as freedom became less and less, and force and dictatorship increased more and more. On making these remarks, my wife said: “Before you do anything find out whether the doctors are really in favour of the scheme or not.” This was all we said about the matter. I think this shows that Mrs Maunsell considered it was a matter for the doctors to decide for themselves without any interference. She could not believe that they might be forced to act contrary to their wishes by any Government in a democratic country. This I should think is the view held by women who are still proud to call themselves British. To conclude, Sir, I do not think it should be reported that my wife spoke at any meeting she did not and could not attend, even if she had wished to. —Yours, etc., L. B. MAUNSELL. Masterton, September 16. It is very much regretted that Mrs Maunsell was reported in error as having attended and spoken at the meeting. The observations attributed to Mrs Maunsell were made in fact by Miss F. Maunsell.—Ed.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAITA19410917.2.38

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Wairarapa Times-Age, 17 September 1941, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
423

OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS Wairarapa Times-Age, 17 September 1941, Page 5

OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS Wairarapa Times-Age, 17 September 1941, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert